Because the NYT is a standard water carrier for the Left Wingery and you can't be bothered to look at the FACTS that might force you to condemn the actions of a Left Wingery Water Carrier...

No, it's not like when you didn't look at the Clinton's tax return before you posted your right-wing propaganda lies that the Clintons did the "EXACT SAME THING" as Trump when they took a small capital gains loss that's available to everyone. I didn't look at the New York Times tax return for the simple reason that it's not posted online that I could find. If anyone can find it, I'd be happy to look it over and see if they did the "EXACT SAME THING." I doubt that the NYT took passive losses known as real estate tax loopholes, but I would wager the NYT deduction for millions (if it is even true, BTW) would be more similar to the loopholes Trump used.

Then, true to form, with absolutely (by your OWN admission) NO FACTS WHATSOEVER, you proceed to DEFEND the LWWC, simple BECAUSE they are the LWWC....

Oh, that same old cut-and-paste argument again? #Shocker Boring.

It's like watching the same old paid commercial over and over and over. If you want people to actually read your tedious repetitive and unimaginative posts, you're going to have to step it up and have some original ideas, get yourself some new material... branch out beyond the same old phone-it-in lame Ctrl+V worn out utter bullshit. :)

Your blind devotion to Party is EXACTLY the problem I am pointing out.. And you just proved it once again...

Blah, blah, blah... cut-and-paste. SOS... BORING.

Monkey, monkey...

“But the people getting killed in this deal are the small-business people and individuals who make just a little bit too much to get any of these subsidies.”
-Bill Clinton On TrainWreckCare...

I guess Bubba is one of those secret Trump supporters I told ya'all about.. :D

Michale

Michale

And the outcry from the Left Wingery over this gross invasion of privacy committed by the Obama Administration??

{{ccchhhiiirrrrpppppp}} {{{cchhhhiiiirrrrpppppp}}}

Hypocrisy, thy name is Left Wingery.....

Michale

Except for the fact that Clinton sycophants (like the WPG) are claiming Trump DID do something wrong, so pointing out that Clinton did the EXACT SAME wrong thing is not only logical and rational, but dead on ballz accurate to boot...

Michale

Who could have predicted that true patriotic Americans would tune out the NFL because they condone I HATE AMERICA stances on national television???

Oh... wait....

Michale

Of course you didn't and of course you would say that..

Because the NYT is a standard water carrier for the Left Wingery and you can't be bothered to look at the FACTS that might force you to condemn the actions of a Left Wingery Water Carrier...

Then, true to form, with absolutely (by your OWN admission) NO FACTS WHATSOEVER, you proceed to DEFEND the LWWC, simple BECAUSE they are the LWWC....

Your blind devotion to Party is EXACTLY the problem I am pointing out.. And you just proved it once again...

Michale

You see, that's the problem with ya'all's double standards...

I haven't looked at the tax return for the New York Times, but I would wager that the deduction NYT used to reduce their tax burden probably did have more in common with a business net operating loss of depreciable assets than a simple capital gains loss that anyone can claim... but I did not look at it, as I said.

Defending a nearly $1 billion business net operating loss of the phantom expense of depreciable assets and passive losses [real estate tax loopholes] by saying it is the "EXACT SAME THING" as a deduction of $3,000 for an actual monetary loss in the stock market is going to always be a false equivalency.

I couldn't care less about the morality or immorality of tax deductions or even the amounts that Trump wrote off in order to lower his tax burden. If Trump didn't do anything wrong, there's really no need to justify what he "didn't do wrong" by saying the Clinton's did the "EXACT SAME THING" when they took a $3,000 capital gains loss. :)

Trump has criticized hedge fund managers, Wall Street executives, and carried interest: There's your double standard. Trump has been pointing at everyone else as to why the system is "rigged," and now he finds himself and his real estate loopholes under fire because of the release of only 3 pages of his tax returns. Add to that, Trump's tax plan does nothing to change the real estate loopholes from which he is benefiting. He says he's an expert and he "alone can fix it," but the fact is that he's proposed absolutely zero in his tax plan that would eliminate a single one of his own loopholes.

You want to see an actual "double standard"? Trump criticizing Wall Street and hedge fund managers and the carried interest tax loophole while exempting his own loopholes is your double standard.

People justifying these real estate loopholes by saying that Trump has nothing to do with them is also utter rubbish.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Ie4Z56Z1LY

DING DING DING!!! WE HAVE A WINNER....

That is EXACTLY what these Left Wingery voters want..

They don't want someone to actually FIX the system..

They just want someone who will talk the talk...

Michale

"That's where the equivalency game ends, because good luck finding a single republican who would ever support that proposition."

See my reply to Liz on the equivalency bit, but most Dems in Congress and Hillary don't support that proposition.

Once elected president, Obama didn't either.
His failed proposal to reform corporate taxes was "revenue neutral".
That's quoting him.
And, it means that corporations would not have paid a larger share... let alone anywhere near a fair share.

At some point, I hope you and other Dem voters actually expect results rather than being satisfied with "champions" who never win.
It's easy to fight for a cause so long as losing is acceptable to those you claim to be fighting for.
And, when a pattern fitting that description across a wide range of policies emerges, you may want to consider they are just empty promises being made to con you.

A

Michale

This elite media was beside itself through the weekend, confident that The New York Times had finally fashioned a silver bullet if not an A-bomb, and the Donald would be destroyed once and for all, restoring civility, good table manners, peace in our time, free pot and soothing silence to the fractious land. Dean Baquet, the executive editor of the newspaper, was celebrated as a particular hero because he promised to go to jail to get the story in print. Bob Woodward, an editor at The Washington Post, said he would have printed it and wants to go to jail, perhaps to share a cell with Mr. Baquet.
The story collected considerable tarnish over the next few hours, however, with the news that The New York Times had avoided paying taxes on a pre-tax profit of $30 million, with a nearly identical legal exploitation of the same tax laws. (That was “different,” of course.) The Times not only got to delay paying its taxes, but through another loophole discovered by its million-dollar lawyers, it got a $3.5 million dollar refund. (Note to everybody else: “Don’t try this at home.”)

You see, that's the problem with ya'all's double standards...

They usually became apparent to everyday Americans relatively quickly...

Michale

"The tax and fiscal policies of the Democrats are not the same as those of the Republicans"

Did I say that anywhere in my comment?
Come on straw woman.

Both D's and R's are responsible for the current system that allows the rich to legally evade taxes... and electing Hillary is NOT going to change that.

In no way, shape or form is that a false equivalency.

If you want to engage on the content of my comment instead of what you want my comment to be saying, I will be happy to participate.

A

Denver Police Running Out Of Space For Confiscated Marijuana
http://denver.cbslocal.com/2016/10/03/denver-police-running-out-of-space-for-confiscated-marijuana/

Can ya help Denver PD out??? :D

Michale

Yer right.. You don't.. But ONLY when it's the person with a '-D' after their name who is doing the immoral...

Still wrong.

That's EXACTLY what it is and that is EXACTLY my point. Your perceptions are different for Clinton because she has a '-D' after her name..

No. It has nothing to do with morality, just the false equivalency of comparing capital gains losses with business operating losses. Nothing more than that.

You slam Trump because he has an '-R' after his name...

I got news for you, I also slammed Trump when he had a "D" after his name and also when he was running as Reform Party.

It's an EXACT equivalency...

Both Trump and Hillary gamed the tax system to their financial advantage...

I guess the whole false equivalency thing just goes right over your head, right? I'm not complaining about morality or gaming any system. I talking about the false equivalency of the right to compare a tax deduction for a capital gains loss with a tax deduction for a business net operating loss as if they are the same thing.

A capital gains loss is money that you have actually lost, money that you invested and lost. No matter how much money you actually lose, you get to write off $3,000 of your actual loss.

A business net operating loss is not the same as an actual cash loss and can be caused by many activities that have no cash flow effect... depreciation expenses on leveraged assets such as casinos/hotels... tax expenses that don't require a cash outlay.

So a capped $3,000 deduction for actual monetary losses of $699,540 of real dollars versus almost $1 billion in business net operating losses of phantom expenses like depreciation on leveraged assets equals a false equivalency that is not the "EXACT SAME THING" no matter how you spin it. The righties are holding up the Clinton's tax returns and saying "look they took an exact same deduction," and they're lying.

Now... later, later. :)

"So, obviously, it takes you 5 minutes to make breakfast.."
-Joe Pesci, MY COUSIN VINNY

:D heh

Michale

Apparently, you DIDN'T give up...

So.. You lied.... :D

I gave up, made myself some coffee, came back later and tried again. Spin that however you want to. :)

Later. :)

Apparently, you DIDN'T give up...

So.. You lied.... :D

Michale

Yer right.. You don't.. But ONLY when it's the person with a '-D' after their name who is doing the immoral...

Cut and paste and still stupid.

Cut and paste and STILL ignorant and irrelevant..

No, a $3,000 deduction for capital gains losses is not exactly gaming the system, but that was not my point.

That's EXACTLY what it is and that is EXACTLY my point. Your perceptions are different for Clinton because she has a '-D' after her name..

You slam Trump because he has an '-R' after his name...

It's really THAT simple...

Cut and paste and still stupid.

Cut and Paste and STILL ignorant and irrelevant..

." That was my point, snowflake, the false equivalency propaganda of the righties in defense of Trump.

It's an EXACT equivalency...

Both Trump and Hillary gamed the tax system to their financial advantage...

The fact that Trump did it with $XXX and Hillary did it with $XX is completely irrelevant to the main point...

Let me dumb it down for ya, sweet cheeks..

If you rob a bank and steal $1000, it's JUST as serious and JUST as bad as if you robbed a bank and stole $1,000,000... The crime is EXACTLY the same.. Only the amount is different..

Michale

Tis sad, tis true.... Tis true, tis sad....

Michale

And another justified police shooting that Left Wingers use as an excuse to riot and destroy... :^/

Michale

So, it's a question of numbers, eh??

Hillary is OK because it's just a little "immoral"....

Oh, the straw man argument. #Shocker I have no issue with morality and taxes.

Like I said.. You can argue what the definition of 'is' is until the cows come home..

Cut and paste and still stupid.

But the FACT is, Hillary did the same thing that Trump did. Game the tax rules to their advantage...

No, a $3,000 deduction for capital gains losses is not exactly gaming the system, but that was not my point.

But it's only "illegal" and "immoral" when the person with the '-R' after their name does it... At least, according to ya'all..

Cut and paste and still stupid.

Face it, sweet cheeks.. You lost on this one. AGAIN... :D

How sad that you think a capped deduction for a capital gains loss and a nearly $1 billion business net operating loss are the "EXACT SAME THING." That was my point, snowflake, the false equivalency propaganda of the righties in defense of Trump. I don't care about the amounts or the morality or whatever bullshit you want to throw in to defend the con, just the bullshit false equivalency of comparing two totally unrelated items on a tax return in order to defend Trump.

Michale

Later. :)

My response didn't post again.

I don't care about all the bullshit you raised about immorality, and again you're arguing the straw man as usual. My issue was the propaganda of the right in comparing actual capital gains losses that have a capped small deduction on HRC's return with nearly $1 billion in business net operating losses that could have been caused by many activities that have no cash flow effect... like depreciation expenses on extremely leveraged assets such as casinos/hotels that don't require a cash outlay.

Saying these are the "EXACT SAME THING" is a lie.

The remainder of your post is your same old move the goalposts and argue the straw man and cut and paste bullshit that have nothing to do with my point.

So, it's a question of numbers, eh??

Hillary is OK because it's just a little "immoral"....

When did I say ANYTHING like that? Capital gains losses are usually buying a stock that didn't perform so you lose money and take a loss on your tax return. I don't see anything "immoral" about anyone losing money on the stock market. There is a cap on the amount that can be deducted in the amount of $3,000 per year. It's the false equivalency of comparing actual investment losses to an almost $1 billion business operating deduction... that was my issue. It's simply propaganda for the righties to make a false equivalency that those items are the "EXACT SAME THING."

"Did Trump do anything ILLEGAL??"

I have no idea, and really that wasn't my point. He won't release his tax returns in full so it's hard to say.

But it's only "illegal" and "immoral" when the person with the '-R' after their name does it... At least, according to ya'all..

I never said anything like that. Again you're always ready to argue something I never said... moving the goal posts and arguing the straw man.

You are only huffing and puffing because someone with a '-R' after their name did it...

That's a new one! *LOL* Wrong again.

Again, *flake*, it's the false equivalency of claiming a $3,000 deduction for a capital gains loss is the "EXACT SAME THING" as a writeoff of nearly $1 billion in business NOL. Capital gains losses where you lose your own money and take a small capped deduction being compared to business net operating losses that could have been caused by many activities that have no cash flow effect like depreciation on leveraged assets, casinos/hotels not requiring an actual cash outlay that are not remotely the "EXACT SAME THING."

Michale

*this is the best recollection I can make of NY's quote.. JL, please feel free to correct me if I got it wrong, but I think the gist is intact...

Answer one question..

Did Trump do anything ILLEGAL??

No, he did not....

He did the exact same thing that every 1%'er INCLUDING Hillary Clinton, EVERY taxpayer in this country does...

They legally gamed the system to their tax advantage...

You are only huffing and puffing because someone with a '-R' after their name did it...

That's all it is...

Michale

Hillary is OK because it's just a little "immoral"....

Like I said.. You can argue what the definition of 'is' is until the cows come home..

But the FACT is, Hillary did the same thing that Trump did. Game the tax rules to their advantage...

But it's only "illegal" and "immoral" when the person with the '-R' after their name does it... At least, according to ya'all..

Face it, sweet cheeks.. You lost on this one. AGAIN... :D

Michale

Dumb *flake* too lazy to look up information on Clinton's 2015 Federal 1040 mindlessly spews back Right Wingery utter bullshit false equivalency propaganda with no substantiation whatsoever now whining that I won't substantiate my claims regarding same tax return. Priceless!

Dumb *flake* spewing propaganda still too lazy to look up Clinton's 2015 Federal 1040? Sad!

https://m.hrc.onl/secretary/10-documents/01-health-financial-records/Clinton_2015_Form_1040_with_Signature_Page.pdf

Schedule D Capital Gains Losses maximum deduction of $3,000 written on Form 1040 line 13 is not quite the EXACT SAME THING as nearly $1 billion in net business operating losses, wouldn't you say, lazy *flake*?

Yea??? And like your HILLARY WON THE DEBATES claims, you provide absolutely NO SUBSTANTIATION for your claims...

Funny how that always is, with you, eh sweetheart... :D

Michale

Ties between Russia and the U.S. deteriorated further after the Obama administration proclaimed bilateral peace talks over Syria dead and Moscow suspended a 16-year-old treaty meant to reduce the risk of nuclear proliferation.
http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2016-10-03/u-s-russian-ties-crumble-under-weight-of-syria-nuclear-pact

Under Odumbo and the Demcorats, relations with Russia are worse than any time since the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan...

Michale

OK... OK...

Now, what do you say about the fact that Hillary Clinton DID THE EXACT SAME THING

I'd say the uneducated rubes that get their talking points from right-wing media propaganda trying to defend Trump with false equivalency bullshit don't realize what a bunch of stupid fools they sound like when they rush to post utter false information like this. Did you even bother to look at the Clinton's 2015 tax return before you posted this bullshit or did you just believe the dumb Right Wingery propaganda calling it the "EXACT SAME THING" and run with it?

The Clinton's 2015 Federal 1040 Schedule D line 16 shows a capital gains loss carryover for $699,540 for which they can take the same maximum deduction as you or I on their federal income tax in the amount of .......... drum roll .......... $3,000 ..... repeat $3,000 ..... in losses in order to reduce their tax burden. If people had bothered to look at the Clinton's 2015 return, you can easily see Schedule D with this information regarding the maximum of $3,000 and then the deduction of $3,000 entered on line 13 of Form 1040. It's not rocket science to figure capital gains and losses on investments.

It takes a special kind of stupid to compare a $3,000 capital gains loss on a tax return to a $900+ million net operating losses of failed businesses. The right-wing propaganda machine is counting on their gullible rubes and their brainless stupidity in order to spread their false equivalency lies, and they rarely disapoint. They love the uneducated. Is there any doubt why they love the brainless minions that spew their propaganda as if it were truth?

Only in the right-wing bubble is an almost $1 billion in business operating losses and a $3,000 capital gains loss considered the "EXACT SAME THING." What is it like to be so programmed that you believe the mindless party propaganda without even bothering to verify that you're being spoon fed utter bullshit?

According to documents obtained from the State Department, Hillary confidant Marie Slaughter sent a memo to "H" suggested legal and "nonlegal" means to get rid of Julian Assange... It's reported that Hillary was considering suggesting a drone strike to kill Assange...

Your thoughts??

Michale

I love it!

"Trumptanic" *LOL*

The same eyes, the same ears, the same nose....

Yea, that's Bubba's offspring...

Of course, Clinton could clear it all up with a DNA test...

Why won't Bubba submit to one.. What's he hiding??

Michale

"The 1980s are calling.. They want their foreign policy back."
-Barack Obama

heh :D

You DO know that the KGB doesn't exist, right???

It's the FSB...

Gods, deliver me from ignorant people who read something on a website and think they're experts... :^/

Michale

Translation: Clintons TRIED to bury it and hoped it would stay buried..

SURPRISE... Heee'ssss baaack... :D

The Wikileaks thing hasn't hurt Hillary a bit so far, and seems to have a backlash effect for Trump,

Yea, it hurt him so bad, he is beating Hillary in majority of battleground states and challenging Hillary's "Big Blue Wall"....

Yea.. Trump is toast... :D

Michale

Sorry, the 'illegitimate black son' story was discredited back in 1992.

The Wikileaks thing hasn't hurt Hillary a bit so far, and seems to have a backlash effect for Trump, as folks are again reminded that the KGB are working on his behalf...

Looks like MATTHEW might be making a westward wobble..... Doesn't look good for the home team..

Michale

Ahhh... Oh yea, personally, she'll "get through it." She's a Clinton after all.... A teflon queen... She has millions of supporters who could see her kill a young unarmed black kid on national TV and they would still support her...

Whether her campaign survives intact is another story... You just KNOW she has to be sweating bullets over what WikiLeaks has on her...

Michale

Whew. I am so good. :)

So, Michale, do you think she'll GET through it? I mean, what are the chances? :)

Go thru with what?? There are so many different threads here.. :D

Michale, do I sound stressed out to you?

Hardly... You sound like your normal chipper, peachy-keen wonderful self.. :D

Michale

Her campaign strategy should be stressing her out. :)

If she fails, you might have to move to Canada or something.

I could try. Heh.

It's clear that Hillary is going to have her worst week ever...

Michale

Trump Is Toast prediction #284... :D

It's so laughably cute how ya'all think, "THIS time it's for real!!!" every single time.. :D

Michale

Uh... Liz already LIVES in Canada, ya doofus...

HELLO!!! McFLY!!!!! :^/

Michale

You think US tax and fiscal policy is stressing me out!?

Are you kidding me!? I talk about that to relieve the stress. Have you checked what's happening out in the world, lately?

Just watched the new Star Trek 90210...

Was pretty good. The tribute to Leonard Nimoy was awesome! And it wasn't just a tack-on to the movie, but an integral part of it...

The tribute to Anton Yelchin was pretty good as well, albeit a bit confusing...

All in all, a good movie... Recommend..

Michale

Just watched the new Star Trek 90210...

Was pretty good. The tribute to Leonard Nimoy was awesome! And it wasn't just a tack-on to the movie, but an integral part of it...

The tribute to Anton Yelchin was pretty good as well, albeit a bit confusing...

All in all, a good movie... Recommend..

Michale

Nope. That's what Donald is for. I was under the impression that she was stressing you out (or at least piling on).

Thanks for the gh tip!

I'm sure I'll have some further comment after I find time to read it ...

You mean, maybe she'll help her campaign ...

Can't prosecute Clinton, and she had nothing to do with the partial release of one tax return from long ago. Her preference, I'm sure would be for him to release filings for, let's say, the last five years.
I'm with the folks who speculate that the Trump campaign might be essentially throwing meat over the wall hoping to distract the starving villagers away from the door.

As for the NYT, nah. We'll leave it at that.

But wait! A restraining order arrives, saying that Trump can't hold any more bogus 'fund raisers', like the one that he did on the night of the Fox Debate (more meat over the wall) during the primaries, filed by the Atty General of the State of New York served this morning!

So much for Trump's Plan B for the next debate.

Those are the people you call "useful lives", Balthy...

They are the ones that take INNOCENT American lives indiscriminately..

But, of course, who cares about that. As long as they vote Democrat, it doesn't matter how many innocent Americans are raped and killed and attacked.. :^/

Michale

And do you know how we KNOW they are facts?

Because Camp Clinton has dropped they attacks on Trump's stolen tax returns...

Over-valuing otherwise junk property for tax purposes is illegal, but as I said, they're still looking at the trail of bread crumbs...

They can look all they want.. But unless they are going to prosecute Clinton and the NY Times... It will be for naught...

Ya lost on this one.. Take your lumps and move on... :D

Michale

The problem is, ya'all consider thugs, criminals, rapists and murderers lives "useful"...

Oh, that's right. They are "useful" because they vote Democrat...

Michale

Over-valuing otherwise junk property for tax purposes is illegal, but as I said, they're still looking at the trail of bread crumbs...

The part that puts otherwise useful lives in legal limbo? It was worth a shot.

Yo... Odumbo... What part of *NO* do you not understand??

Michale

Yes to both...

Just as the NY TIMES had a very good accountant who got them a 3.4million dollar deduction in 2014, even though they had a 30 million profit that year..

The simple fact is, it's not illegal despite your "promising" claims...

And like Joshua said before, you can't knock someone for doing legal tax stuff to serve their bottom line...

Michale

In other words... "UUUHHH UHHH!!!"

It's right there in Clinton's tax returns..

Michale

I would say that you've been spending too much time in the right wing blogosphere, which has been desperately trying to create a false equivalence between the Clintons' one-time deduction and Trump's lifetime of tax dodging.

In 2015, the Clintons, despite taking the deduction that the right is biting into like a juicy steak, paid $3.24 million in federal income taxes, paying an effective rate of 30%.

Of course we don't know what Donald Trump paid in income taxes in 2015, or for the twenty years prior to that, since he hasn't released any tax returns for that period. The Clintons, by comparison, have released over 30 years worth of tax returns, all showing a pattern of hefty charitable giving, and tax payments in line with their income.

Trump, by comparison, does his charitable giving by using other people's money as if it were his own.

Besides, didn't Giuliani say yesterday that using that deduction was a 'genius' move? Wouldn't, by the same reasoning, Clinton be a 'genius' for using that same deduction? Or did she just have a very good accountant?

Yer a Gary Hart fan..

Hillary doesn't get it...
http://www.vanityfair.com/news/2016/10/gary-hart-politics

Michale

Well, I am sure glad the WPG didn't stoop to blatant fear-mongering... :^/

Michale

I guess black lives DON'T matter when they are the illegitimate son of Bubba Clinton...

Michale

You get yer balls in a vice while hoisted by yer own Picard... OUCH

:D

Michale

http://www.toledoblade.com/Politics/2016/10/03/Hillary-Clinton-to-speak-today-in-Toledo.html

This is supposed to be a speech about the economy and taxes. She will also call out Wells Fargo and the practices of Donald Trump and the Trump Organization. Maybe she'll throw you a bone.

Don't go away mad..... :^D

Michale

Immoral? Well, there's that term again. If Hillary didn't pay Taxes in 2015, then how can she ever justify, as president, any tax cut or tax increase? By acting antisocially, she has lost the Moral Authority to do the job she's seeking, like a governor who accepts lavish gifts can't then prosecute public officials for corruption, can he? If she's acted contrary to the way she expects others to act, she's lost the ability to conduct her job properly.
-Balthasar

So, we are in complete agreement... By avoiding taxes, Hillary simply cannot be elected president...

:D

Do me a favor, Balthy.. Send me a screen shot of the look on your face... :D

http://tinyurl.com/zbv8nwx

Bet it looks something like that.. :D

Michale

"Oh... well... uh.... It's OK when a person with a '-D' after their name does it..."

or

"NUUU UUHHHHH!!!!"

Take yer pick, Balthasar... :D

Michale

Immoral? Well, there's that term again. If Trump hasn't paid Taxes since the 1990's, then how can he ever justify, as president, any tax cut or tax increase? By acting antisocially, he has lost the Moral Authority to do the job he's seeking, like a governor who accepts lavish gifts can't then prosecute public officials for corruption, can he? If he's acted contrary to the way he expects others to act, he's lost the ability to conduct his job properly.
If he expects everyone not to pay taxes (as he does), who will fund the government? Where will the money for his Yuge dreamy projects come from?

OK... OK...

Now, what do you say about the fact that Hillary Clinton DID THE EXACT SAME THING

"HA!!! BOOBY!!!"
-Lucy, DESPICABLE ME 2

:D

For the record, even the NY TIMES concedes that Trump didn't do anything illegal..

A very wise Weigantian once said you can't knock someone for legally gaming the system to their financial advantage..

Apparently, that only applies with DEMOCRATS legally game the system...

Michale

Illegal? Still investigating, but looks promising.

Immoral? Well, there's that term again. If Trump hasn't paid Taxes since the 1990's, then how can he ever justify, as president, any tax cut or tax increase? By acting antisocially, he has lost the Moral Authority to do the job he's seeking, like a governor who accepts lavish gifts can't then prosecute public officials for corruption, can he? If he's acted contrary to the way he expects others to act, he's lost the ability to conduct his job properly.
If he expects everyone not to pay taxes (as he does), who will fund the government? Where will the money for his Yuge dreamy projects come from?

That's because there is absolutely NO EVIDENCE to support such a theory except the wishful thinking of those en.... namored by Party ideology...

But no one answered my question.

Did Trump do anything illegal?? Yes or No??

Michale

I would LOVE to see Odumbo do that..

It would GUARANTEE a Trump victory...

Michale

WikiLeaks is set to do it's promised Hillary Email Dump... :D

Michale

*****PENNSYLVANIA*****

Is that the same *****PENNSYLVANIA***** where Hillary blew a 10 point lead down to TOSS UP status?? :D

Michale

Unless you are not a US citizen, I highly doubt that....

Regardless, it's not even close to being my point...

Michale

I stand corrected, sweet cheeks.. :D

Michale

Yea.. Just like the President can unilaterally launch a nuclear strike completely on his own..

You were wrong then, yer wrong now, honey bunch.. :D

Michale

thank you for the new years wishes.

JL

Of course. That's where the equivalency game ends, because good luck finding a single republican who would ever support that proposition.

The great champion of ending the 'Delaware Loophole' was the recently-retired Michigan Democrat Carl Levin, who must have realized at some point that Michigan would have been one of America's richest states if Ford, Chrysler, GM, etc. had paid their taxes in the same state where their corporate offices were located.

Hopefully, E. Warren will pick it up as one of the many tax fairness causes she's daily urged to address. She'd have a steep climb to get anything into law, though: in all of the years that Levin tried, he could never get the bill out of committee. The most vocal opponent of changing the law, surprisingly, is the National Association of Secretaries of State, a politically powerful group, according to a 2012 NYT article on the subject. According to the Times, Levin introduced bills to end Delaware's tax haven status three times after 2000, one co-sponsored by then-Senator Barack Obama.

Beware the pitfalls of false equivalencies - Liz

The tax and fiscal policies of the Democrats are not the same as those of the Republicans.

You just have to examine the historical record of the past few decades to understand that and to discern between the strategies of the two parties with respect to tax and fiscal policy. One is pro-growth and one is decidedly not.

Beware the pitfalls of false equivalencies.

Pretty sure this isn't what you are talking about...

Our tax code allows this legal tax avoidance by the rich and it reflects very poorly on both Repubs and Dems in the establishment... and, by poorly, I mean it exposes them as corrupt Big Money coddlers sticking it to the little guy.

It is part of the pattern of regulated or legalized criminality that one percenters have legislated for themselves in everything from pollution to campaign finance, taxes to contracting.

It is one of many issues this shallow campaign pitting two corrupt establishment insiders against each other isn't addressing.

Hillary and Trump both have shell corporations set up in Delaware to evade taxes... you know... Biden's home state that has more corporations than people.

Avoiding talking about the existing tax policies that are blowing a massive hole in our budget with bipartisan support amounts to deceiving voters.

The best pro-growth tax and fiscal policy would be to have the rich and corporations pay their fair share.

This election guarantees that's not going to happen.

A

Section 6103g of the Internal Revenue Code explicitly states:

(g) Disclosure to President and certain other persons

(1) In general Upon written request by the President, signed by him personally, the Secretary shall furnish to the President, or to such employee or employees of the White House Office as the President may designate by name in such request, a return or return information with respect to any taxpayer named in such request. Any such request shall state—

(A) the name and address of the taxpayer whose return or return information is to be disclosed,

(B) the kind of return or return information which is to be disclosed,

(C) the taxable period or periods covered by such return or return information, and

(D) the specific reason why the inspection or disclosure is requested.

Just as it's possible that Trump will win in a landslide..

Not that anyone here will acknowledge that... :D

Wrong again, snowflake.

I will acknowledge that it's possible that Trump could win in a landslide. It depends on whose definition of landslide, but it's not likely that he would win in a landslide but nevertheless a possibility.

Kick [112]: ah, the missing signature. Sure giveaway. Nice way for Marla to get at him without becoming the issue herself.

She actually did sign it, and then someone copied or scanned it with the signature flag still attached. This is a clue that this copy was most likely made before its filing with the State of New Jersey.

Was seated last night next to a Republican from Indiana. I was regaled for much of the evening with scenarios that would result in Pence as the chief executive. He also thinks Priebus will be out as RNC chair no matter which way the election goes.
Yes, Poor Reinhold is most likely out of there. It's the unwritten two-man rule. Lose twice... pay the price. *LOL*

I've had very similar conversations along the lines that regardless who wins the presidency, the GOP will be looking to have them impeached and that the GOP will have to split into two parties eventually or weed out the baggers in lieu thereof. If Trumpism wins, they own it.

I don't think we have to worry about a President Pence or Trump because:

*****PENNSYLVANIA*****

There is still time, of course. :)

Unlike Rmoney's 47-percenter video, this one was on the fake news channel and at least Willard paid a little tax.

[I'm not Jewish, but I like to celebrate every new year I can!]

Wrong again, snowflake. I have neither a "D" or an "R" after my name. I will say I do have a title after my name, but neither of those are it. :p

You are merely speculating...

ECHOOOOO, Echoooo, echo. *LOL*

Tax returns are private and confidential.. If they were not released by Trump, their release was unauthorized..

Which is close enough to stolen for mine and Listen's discussion..

It's "close enough to stolen." Utter bullshit, snowflake. You're moving the goalposts again because in your post you didn't even mention the fact that Trump may have actually released these state returns himself, and you said that "by definition they would have HAD to be stolen."

"Unauthorized release" and "stolen" are two totally different things. We don't expect you to admit you were wrong, snowflake. :D